Half this board thinks Dak is better than Aikman, when trying to justifying signing Dak to a top 5 QB contract.
I was told Dak is more accurate thank Troy and era comparision is overrated.
I of course disagree...
If Dak has McNabb's career we would be jumping for joy. I honestly dont know what a HOF'er is anymore. It seems like the yardsticks keep moving and getting distorted.
4 straight championship games
1 SB apperance
He was a franchise QB and the face of an organization
I can see his HOF argument.
Unfortunately, contract value is not the same as actual player value. This is especially true of the QB position where many guys have been "overpaid" because of being a QB and when they got their second contract. There is such a desperate need to have a quality QB that the position has kind of become overvalued. You end up paying someone way more money than their actual talent. Whether you or I think Dak or any QB is or isn't worth a huge contract is largely irrelevant. The league is now set up for these guys to get those big deals.
McNabb had a good career. A good career is not a Hall of Fame career. There is some comparison to Aikman as far as total stats. The difference between these two QBs is that Aikman's efficiency went up in the playoffs(dramatically in the Superbowl years) and McNabb's went down.
I think it also hurts that the Eagles had no problems replacing McNabb with a lesser QB. Showed him the door only to make Michael Vick their franchise QB. They didn't replace McNabb with a young, promising talent or a distinguished veteran with many accolades. Vick was a 30 year veteran who never had a passer rating above 80, but they went with him. They seemingly couldn't wait to move on from McNabb.